Bedoukian   RussellIPM   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Alphascents
Pherobio
InsectScience
E-Econex
Counterpart-Semiochemicals
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous AbstractPredicting the emission rate of volatile organic compounds from vinyl flooring    Next AbstractUse of solid-phase microextraction coupled to gas chromatography-mass spectrometry for determination of urinary volatile organic compounds in autistic children compared with healthy controls »

Anal Chim Acta


Title:Use of direct headspace-mass spectrometry coupled with chemometrics to predict aroma properties in Australian Riesling wine
Author(s):Cozzolino D; Smyth HE; Cynkar W; Janik L; Dambergs RG; Gishen M;
Address:"The Australian Wine Research Institute, Waite Road, Urrbrae, P.O. Box 197, Adelaide, SA 5064, Australia. Daniel.Cozzolino@awri.com.au"
Journal Title:Anal Chim Acta
Year:2008
Volume:20070922
Issue:1
Page Number:2 - 7
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2007.09.036
ISSN/ISBN:1873-4324 (Electronic) 0003-2670 (Linking)
Abstract:"The aim of this study was to investigate the potential use of a direct headspace-mass spectrometry electronic nose instrument (MS e_nose) combined with chemometrics as rapid, objective and low cost technique to measure aroma properties in Australian Riesling wines. Commercial bottled Riesling wines were analyzed using a MS e_nose instrument and by a sensory panel. The MS e_nose data generated were analyzed using principal components analysis (PCA) and partial least squares (PLS1) regression using full cross validation (leave one out method). Calibration models between MS e_nose data and aroma properties were developed using partial least squares (PLS1) regression, yielding coefficients of correlation in calibration (R) and root mean square error of cross validation of 0.75 (RMSECV: 0.85) for estery, 0.89 (RMSECV: 0.94) for perfume floral, 0.82 (RMSECV: 0.62) for lemon, 0.82 (RMSECV: 0.32) for stewed apple, 0.67 (RMSECV: 0.99) for passion fruit and 0.90 (RMSECV: 0.86) for honey, respectively. The relative benefits of using MS e_nose will provide capability for rapid screening of wines before sensory analysis. However, the basic deficiency of this technique is lack of possible identification and quantitative determination of individual compounds responsible for the different aroma notes in the wine"
Keywords:Australia Calibration Honey/analysis Mass Spectrometry/*methods Odorants/*analysis Passiflora/chemistry Wine/*analysis;
Notes:"MedlineCozzolino, Daniel Smyth, Heather E Cynkar, Wies Janik, Les Dambergs, Robert G Gishen, Mark eng Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Netherlands 2008/06/25 Anal Chim Acta. 2008 Jul 21; 621(1):2-7. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2007.09.036. Epub 2007 Sep 22"

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2024. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2024 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 16-11-2024